AntiRevisionism wrote on 2020-12-23, 18:25:

I am finally got my new PIII system build around the ASUS P2B-D up and running. […]
Show full quote

I am finally got my new PIII system build around the ASUS P2B-D up and running.

I am using a HSG1065 LCD monitor with a native resolution 1920 x 1200 connected via VGA to an AGP NVIDIA TNT2 M64 32MB. Using Forceware driver 71.84. Even over VGA on this ancient card 1920 x 1200 is crystal clear under 98 SE.

However, 800 x 600.... looks really awful, like someone smeared vaseline on the screen. And this is even with the correct aspect ratio set on the monitor. Almost, but not quite as bad, as my as Gateway Solo 2100 and it's screen tearing. Given most of the games I want to play use this resolution, it's a bit disappointing, as this is a nice large nearly 30 inch screen. I had thought 800 x 600 would scale extremely well to 1600 x 1200.

Any suggestions for this particular setup I could try, or should I just bit the bullet and use a CRT.

The issue is likely that the internal scaler in your monitor is crappy .

I suggest using an external scaler/digitizer, such as something from the RGB-DVI 300 or RGB-HDMI 300 series from Extron . They are among the best scalers available at a reasonable price (on the used market). They accept 60Hz and 70Hz (at least in DOS resolutions) input, but always output 60Hz .

darry wrote on 2020-12-23, 18:36:

I suggest using an external scaler/digitizer, such as something from the RGB-DVI 300 or RGB-HDMI 300 series from Extron . They are among the best scalers available at a reasonable price (on the used market). They accept 60Hz and 70Hz (at least in DOS resolutions) input, but always output 60Hz .

I've never used an external scalar before, but sounds interesting. In my case I assume this would take the 800x600 signal, the scale would properly upscale it and then output a 1920x1200 signal to the monitor?

I was also considering switching the video card to an MX 400 that has a DVI output. Would an all digital conversion flow work better in this scenario?

AntiRevisionism wrote on 2020-12-23, 19:41:

darry wrote on 2020-12-23, 18:36:

I suggest using an external scaler/digitizer, such as something from the RGB-DVI 300 or RGB-HDMI 300 series from Extron . They are among the best scalers available at a reasonable price (on the used market). They accept 60Hz and 70Hz (at least in DOS resolutions) input, but always output 60Hz .

I've never used an external scalar before, but sounds interesting. In my case I assume this would take the 800x600 signal, the scale would properly upscale it and then output a 1920x1200 signal to the monitor?

Yes . Unfortunately, no scaler would be as sharp a simple line-doubling (equivalent to integer scaling, without filtering), but I know of no external device, affordable or otherwise, that can do that to an 800x600 signal . (OSSC tops off at 640x480-->1280x960 in line2x mode, the yet unreleased OSSC Pro might be able to do better).

On a modern setup, current video cards now have drivers that allow integer scaling, but this will unfortunately not help us here .

AntiRevisionism wrote on 2020-12-23, 19:41:

I was also considering switching the video card to an MX 400 that has a DVI output. Would an all digital conversion flow work better in this scenario?

Maybe, but that would largely depend on the monitor's behavior . I imagine that the monitor might scale differently, depending on the input used, but I think that would be unlikely . It's definitely worth a try, though, if you have already have the card .

Get a decent 5:4 LCD, like a Dell or HP. I scale DOS games from as low as 320x240 and it looks crisp and clear. Your monitor does not even have the same aspect ratio.

kolderman wrote on 2020-12-23, 20:20:

Get a decent 5:4 LCD, like a Dell or HP. I scale DOS games from as low as 320x240 and it looks crisp and clear. Your monitor does not even have the same aspect ratio.

800x600 is 4:3 , so neither a 16:10 nor a 5:4 have the "right" aspect ratio . This does not really matter if the monitor has a proper 4:3 mode (this obviously implies either vertical or horizontal black bars, but is inevitable if preserving 4: aspect on a non 4:3 monitor, unless zooming/cropping is used).

Additionally, OP is using a 28" monitor , the 5:4 LCDs you mention top off at 19" or so . Scaling artefacts/issues/quality become more visible on bigger screens, so using the best scaler possible is more important when using a larger screen .

As another option, if OP's monitor has a non-scaling 1:1 mode where 800x600 can be displayed at the center of the screen, he could get a smaller non scaled image . Since the screen is about 14.84" high, displaying an 800x600 image at 1:1 pixel ratio (half monitor height) would yield a 12.37" diagonal image . If OP's monitor does not have a 1:1 mode, using a DVI card with Nvidia scaling options might allow a 1:1 image in Windows with some of the newer Nvidia drivers .

All that being said, 800x60 in 4:3 mode on a 28" monitor will either be somewhat blocky/pixelated (if using integer scaling/line/doubling) or somewhat smoothed/soft-ish due to the filtering the scaler uses . Using a smaller monitor, as you suggest, would make it easier for the OP to get a sharper image .

I personally use a 25" 1920x1200 monitor in 4:3 mode and find that 800x600, upscaled to 1600x1200 by the monitor's integrated scaler looks OK to me, though not as good as line-doubling/integer scaling would be . Maybe I am more tolerant or maybe my monitor has a better scaler or maybe the OP's even bigger monitor size is what makes the difference here . As an additional possibility, maybe OSSC Pro will let me have a sharper image (if it can line-double 800x600 and if I can afford one) .

EDIT: Added last 2 paragraphs .

Just as a follow up in case anyone has the same monitor in the future: I replaced the NVIDIA TNT2 M64 and replaced it with a HIS ATI RADEON 7500 R7S-23 card. Made a night and day difference. It seems the Radeon is doing proper integer scaling (or the monitor is playing nicer with it).